Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  E. Mounier
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Znaczenie personalistycznej krytyki artystycznej w poszukiwaniu sensu sztuki

100%
Winnicka-Gburek J.
Estetyka i Krytyka
|
2011
|
issue 2(21)
167-178
EN
I perceive the art criticism as the philosophical reflection on art. It is possible to ask question about the sense of art only on the basis of philosophy including, among others, peronalism. In this text, the concept of Tymon Terlecki’s personalistic criticism based on Emmanuel Mounier’s philosophy is analyzed to assess the usefulness of its main assumptions and design a model of the contemporary artistic critic. The analysis of such concepts as person, personal movement, freedom, transcendence, symbol and view leads to the conclusion that a critic personalist is not supposed to be satisfied only with deciphering the sense of art. However, s/he is to extend the scope of her/his reflection with the context of the work’s potential impact on an artist and a viewer.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Potrzeba przełomu. Dialogiczne spojrzenie z Ferdynandem Ebnerem na rozwój sytuacji duchowej we współczesnych społeczeństwach Europy.

51%
Skorulski K.
Filozofia Chrześcijańska
|
2012
|
vol. 9
92-112
EN
The „Tischner-Days” Symposium of 2010 examined the topic: „The World and Faith in a Time of Breakthrough”. The newly published conference papers try to define the situation of culture and faith in western civilisation today. The Symposium participants concentrated their efforts mostly on such terms as „individualisation”, „secularisation” and the „holy”. In this article we try to re- read these terms as the description of ongoing changes in the context of Ferdinand Ebners’ dialogical view of the person. Our attempt is therefore to evaluate whether the processes result   in a more personal (inter-personal) world or, rather, in a new ideology, experienced in „I-aloneness” (Ebner). Individualisation – the key term of our analysis – could signify a positive process (as for example K. Popper suggests), when it truly leads from collectivism with its ideology to individualism understood as a (dialogical) person (as in Ebner, Guardini or Mounier). Currently secularisation (Ch. Taylor, K. Gabriel) stands in opposition to Max Webers’ old „secularisation thesis” of pluralisation according to the individual situation of the person, rather than the disappearance of faith. The changes in the sphere of the „holy” could be positive if seen as focusing on the „I-Thou” relation. However, when the ongoing individualisation is not grounded in a dialogical view of the person, it can end up merely as a shift from one ideology to another; secularisation could end up merely as the dissipation of consciousness in a superficial and impersonal „vision”, and the experience of God could become impersonal as mere energy or radiation. When the real life of the person must be seen in terms of his real „spirit”, we are, instead, dealing here with a „dream of the spirit” – as Ebner  says.What then is to be done? To make our times more human (so the humanity of the person will subsist in the dialogical dimension), the „need for a breakthrough” becomes urgent. We should not only foster the interpersonal dialogue, but also fight against „structural loneliness”, i.e. to convert abstract (inhumane) notions into human (dialogical) notions (for example as D. Graebers’ attempts with „debt”).  
PL
The „Tischner-Days” Symposium of 2010 examined the topic: „The World and Faith in a Time of Breakthrough”. The newly published conference papers try to define the situation of culture and faith in western civilisation today. The Symposium participants concentrated their efforts mostly on such terms as „individualisation”, „secularisation” and the „holy”. In this article we try to re- read these terms as the description of ongoing changes in the context of Ferdinand Ebners’ dialogical view of the person. Our attempt is therefore to evaluate whether the processes result   in a more personal (inter-personal) world or, rather, in a new ideology, experienced in „I-aloneness” (Ebner). Individualisation – the key term of our analysis – could signify a positive process (as for example K. Popper suggests), when it truly leads from collectivism with its ideology to individualism understood as a (dialogical) person (as in Ebner, Guardini or Mounier). Currently secularisation (Ch. Taylor, K. Gabriel) stands in opposition to Max Webers’ old „secularisation thesis” of pluralisation according to the individual situation of the person, rather than the disappearance of faith. The changes in the sphere of the „holy” could be positive if seen as focusing on the „I-Thou” relation. However, when the ongoing individualisation is not grounded in a dialogical view of the person, it can end up merely as a shift from one ideology to another; secularisation could end up merely as the dissipation of consciousness in a superficial and impersonal „vision”, and the experience of God could become impersonal as mere energy or radiation. When the real life of the person must be seen in terms of his real „spirit”, we are, instead, dealing here with a „dream of the spirit” – as Ebner  says.What then is to be done? To make our times more human (so the humanity of the person will subsist in the dialogical dimension), the „need for a breakthrough” becomes urgent. We should not only foster the interpersonal dialogue, but also fight against „structural loneliness”, i.e. to convert abstract (inhumane) notions into human (dialogical) notions (for example as D. Graebers’ attempts with „debt”).
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.